Prev | Current Page 384 | Next

Various

"The New York Times Current History of the European War, Vol. 1, January 9, 1915 What Americans Say to Europe"

But the point involved, namely, the charge of England's
aggression in the present instance, is clearly an a priori one, based on
a presupposition of monopoly which lacks material support. No evidence
is presented to justify the statement, nor do the facts seem to allow of
any such construction.
The second argument, England's support of Russia's unwillingness to
permit the expiation of an ignominious murder, is a strange and
unfortunate commentary on how even in philosophic minds a preconceived
idea will distort the most unmistakable evidence. For Servia in her
reply to the Austrian demands agreed to have just punishment inflicted
upon the murderers, even going so far as to cause the arrest of those
perhaps unjustly suspected by the Austrian committee and to suggest an
international court. How, then, did Russia stand in the way of the
punishment? Austria declared war, with the self-confessed assurances of
German support, all too obviously for reasons other than the ones
mentioned in the ultimatum to which Servia acquiesced. The charge of
Russian mobilization in view of such a situation suggests the temper of
the man who, when caught in his own bear trap, tries to find his
neighbor at fault.


Pages:
372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396